Our greatest threat is climate change not Russia
Geraint Davies
8,500 tonnes of ice melted from Greenland during every second that Defence Secretary John Healey gave his resignation speech.
It was the pivotal move that meant Keir Starmer had to resign once Andy Burnham won the Makerfield by-election. And all thoughts were on military not environmental security
Yet a week later the European heatwave baked Britain and reminded us that, as politicians focussed on the future potential threat from Russia, we face a real threat which is already affecting our way of life.
We know that the Ukrainian invasion has meant expensive conventional heavy arms are being outmanoeuvred by lower cost drones and that AI, satellite and automated systems underline the need for a flexible evolution of our defence capabilities.
This neither implies a fixed GDP share for defence nor putting current drone technology centre-stage. In any case the race to become the most lethal is itself a distraction and contribution towards our greatest shared enemy – the real threat to our species’ very existence from climate change.
Let’s not forget that since the 1990 Kyoto agreement baseline global emissions have risen by 60%. Global warming is causing rising seas, droughts and floods, land loss and forced migration, water and food shortages and conflict over depleting resources.
Russia has captured fossil fuel deposits in Ukraine and the US has taken control of Venezuela’s oil. Most recently President Trump’s war-mongering in Iran and support for Russia has made Europe more concerned about defence. Meanwhile his “drill baby drill” mantra has supported Putin’s oil interests and melting the ice caps gives Russia better commercial and military shipping access.
The AI revolution is accelerating climate change and inequality as Tony Blair’s tech-bros-funded foundation suggests that the UK government abandons net zero and embraces AI.
Let’s hope its tentacles are not too deeply embedded and that a new Burnham-led government can be persuaded to change Labour’s approach and put people and planet first.
There’s lots that can be done and we’ve been moving in the wrong direction.
We know that the good work of President Biden is being squandered by Trump. Meanwhile, China’s green initiatives surpass the rest of the world providing lower costs for a green transition but its carbon emissions also now exceed those of the US, EU and Russia combined.
However, 25% of greenhouse gases comes from trade so as their trade rapporteur I got the Council of Europe to agree to my proposals to make trade agreements compliant with the Paris Climate Change Agreement.
Carbon border taxing
The UK is late in plans to implement carbon border taxing in line with the EU Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism. That would have made UK steel more price competitive with carbon-intensive Chinese and Indian steel imports. It can also help green energy projects like the Swansea Bay tidal lagoon become more cost effective.
In fact, I proposed in 2023 that a carbon border tax plus green tidal lagoon energy be implemented to safeguard Port Talbot steel production instead of giving Tata government cash to produce then import dirty steel into the UK.
The UK Government should at least safeguard EU standards of environmental protection in the UK, for water, air, soil, flood protection, and climate change as I proposed in the UK 2016 Environmental Protection Maintenance of EU Standards Bill.
This would mean moving towards the World Health Organisation air quality standards that I also proposed in the 2019 Clean Air Bill which would in turn encourage industrial innovation to reduce climate change and increase UK green exports.
Curbing plastics production through taxation, as I proposed in the 2022 Plastics Bill, would help avert there being more plastic than fish in the sea by 2050, as forecasted by the UN.
Meanwhile, the government should not be committing billions to unproven carbon capture alone allowing oil companies to continue climate change scot-free. Fossil fuel companies should help foot the bill and taxpayer investment should focus on green production.
Cutting edge research
Ironically cutting edge research into carbon capture through algae at Swansea University wasn’t helped by the previous government’s failure to replace lost EU funding after Brexit.
As a simplistic minimum the government should prioritise solar panels, home insulation and heat pumps and not just new guns.
By the end of John Healey’s nine minute speech 4.6 million tonnes of ice had melted from Greenland – enough to fill nearly 2000 Olympic swimming pools. The climate crisis is upon us and the UK should take greater leadership.
Perhaps Andy Burnham should turn a new leaf from Keir Starmer and stop imprisoning those who oppose climate change and genocide and instead focus on producing a peaceful and sustainable world for all.
Ultimately we need cooperation to build a safer world but we all understand that if the US and Russia put aggression and self-interest first then we need to build both military and environmental security for all our futures.
Geraint Davies was MP for Swansea West 2010-2024 and for Croydon Central 1997-2005
Support our Nation today
For the price of a cup of coffee a month you can help us create an independent, not-for-profit, national news service for the people of Wales, by the people of Wales.
Get more trusted Welsh news
Choose Nation.Cymru as a preferred source in Google News to see more of our journalism.
But you cannot ignore Russia, and China are running away with the greening prize and Trump is removing protection for the environment, the US are now a massive threat to our green security. Their think tanks invade us through UK political parties. Putin and Trump getting along with the world is a pipe dream. We need at least to forge ahead greening the UK up. Net Zero isn’t a slogan, it’s survival. And Burnham had better not do the UK harm removing targets. Tory and Reform are owned by the US and will take deeper into the furnace. Ready for… Read more »
Don’t downplay the threat from Russia it’s well known in military circles that we could be at war within two years.
Russia has failed to defeat Ukraine in the last 4 years and is losing large numbers of soldiers while falling to make any breakthrough. This is despite Putin being totally committed to defeating Ukraine and incorporating it into his Russian empire. Putin could still pose a threat to the Baltic states because he also considers them part of his empire -;though Putin’s own future is steadily becoming more precarious as the war on Ukraine becomes increasingly unpopular in Russia. The idea that Britain could be at war with Russia in 2 years is complete fantasy, pushed by military circles to… Read more »
They are already at war with us. Just we seem to want to be the nation that thinks we obey the rules.
See Brexit.
Well it’s a good job that the UK won’t be at war with Russia with an army that wouldn’t even fit into the Millennium Stadium in Cardiff and Submarines and Aircraft carriers that spend more time in repair than out at sea.Even the warship that was recently sent to defend the British Military base in Cyprus broke down.
Army 60,000 ish, Reserves 20,000 ish…. Russia wouldn’t even have to send tanks.
Time will tell but the cyber and disinformation war has already begun.
They have already run a chemical weapons attack on the UK that had the potential to kill thousands.
The shooting to warn the UK yacht in the channel, though allowed by law, the Russian ship was stationary in an area that has an interconnect between France and the UK.
It is perhaps slightly partial to say that China’s carbon emissions exceed those of the US, EU and Russia combined without reminding the reader that its population also exceeds theirs.
US is about to outspend China on fossil fuels. Article FT. Paywalled, but the drive is data centres.
I would suggest that if we used a different carbon accounting system where the emissions associated with manufacturing a product were assigned to where the end product was actually consumed, the bad guys might look very different. It’s not just about the dubious morality of outsourcing emissions responsibility, it’s that we as consumers are losing the opportunity to drive change because we would favour products made closer to home and made using cleaner techniques.
UK sold out its domestic manufacturing decades ago and by so doing impoverished much of our working class. Its consumers now hooked on cheap stuff fetched in from a variety of sources yet they still manage to pollute and degrade our land, air rivers and seas. Shuffling costs around won’t solve anything unless better manufacturing practices are adopted, including fewer transportation miles. And stop buying so much throw away junk.
Worth noting… Climate change will get us in 50-100 years. Russia are probably going to launch us an invasion into Western Europe in about 10-15 years (optimistically). In the end dead is dead, but I’d rather live 50 years than 15 thanks.